• WhiteHawk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      1 year ago

      For the love of christ, stop saying that. Every single time someone makes this comment. We. Get. It.

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Do we? Because the absolutely astonishing sense of self-importance humans have would indicate otherwise.

        Other beings live here, and while humans fuck humans over in the name of greed and power, we bulldoze entire ecosystems without any consideration for the other creatures that lived here whatsoever.

        No, you’re wrong. Most humans live, act, and speak as if the entire world, hell the entire universe, should be bent to better serve our naive, entitled species exclusively.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a thought-terminating cliche that serves to downplay the problem because “hurr durr the animals will be okay” (even though they actually won’t since we’re in the middle of the Anthropocene mass extinction, but never mind that) and to act as a derailment tactic.

          • kava@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nature will inevitably adjust. This isn’t the first mass extinction and it won’t be the last. I’m more concerned about agriculture and how the changing climate could lead to mass starvation, refugee issues, etc. The animals can inherit the Earth after we blow ourselves up with nukes.

          • r1veRRR@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t read it that way, quite the opposite. So, so many people act like this is mostly about protecting the climate or the environment or animals, not about protecting our way of life. The way so many frame it as protecting the earth makes it so easy to make it sound optional.

            But the world will be okay, it doesn’t need protecting. It’s the 8 billion humans that RELY on the world AS IT IS NOW that will be fucked. It’s human protection, not ecological protection.

        • foo@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          43
          ·
          1 year ago

          Only an idiot thinks that when we say *we are destroying the planet " they literally means the planet will explode or something. It’s clear that we mean the only part of the planet that is meaningful for us, the biosphere.

          • blue_zephyr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Which we also won’t destroy. Life on earth will adapt, but we’re making it inhospitable for ourselves.

            • narp@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Well, I guess all the life forms that are going extinct through the Holocene/anthropogene extinction event, which humans caused, don’t matter?

              Sure there will be life on earth and it will adapt, but don’t act like we’re not taking down whole families of plants and animals with us… because it’s already happening.

            • FireMyth
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Look genius- we know the planet will be just fine. When ppl say we are destroying the planet we obvious (except to you) are talking about our own survival on the planet.

            • foo@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Again Sherlock, nobody is talking about the frame of view of random animals that may or may not be fine. We are only talking about our frame of reference.

              If you actually considered the semantics of “technically some people will still be alive but living in a mad max like apocalypse or jellyfish will be fine” means that our biosphere hasn’t been destroyed for humans you are being ridiculously pedantic.

          • r1veRRR@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            But it’s the idiots that CONSTANTLY argue that the world will be fine. The framing of it as protection of animals/the planet/the climate makes it incredibly easy for people to pretend it’s optional, not directly related to them. This isn’t a hypothetical point, EVERY SINGLE climate discussion I’ve ever witnessed some mouthbreather has argued that “the climate will continue to exist, it doesn’t need protecting”.

            What needs protecting isn’t the planet, the ecology, the animals or plants, it’s US. It’s ENTIRELY an US problem.

      • DarkSpectrum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are a lot of people still waking up to the situation so I think it’s worth saying even if you personally have heard it many times.

    • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Agreed, we and other land mammals will suffer greatly, but life on Earth is hearty and just as the great George Carlin said, once we’re gone, the planet will heal itself from the failed mutation that was homo sapien.